There is a limit to free speech

Jan 18, 2015 Features / Columnists, My Column

---

When two Muslims attacked the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo and killed twelve people because of what the magazine kept doing, the world reacted furiously. The French hunted down the men and killed them. They also killed an accomplice who took over a Jewish supermarket and killed four people.
The magazine then went on to publish much more copies than it ever did. It announced that it was going to print one million copies, much more than the 30,000 copies it printed each week. When last I heard the magazine had printed three million copies (all of which disappeared in the marketplace) and was printing even more.
At issue is the disrespect for someone’s religion. The magazine mocked the Prophet Muhammad in many cartoons, much to the annoyance of the Muslim community. However, the common thread was that one does not kill everyone who offends us. And this is what I firmly believe. Yet I cannot tolerate someone mocking another person’s religion.
In Guyana we have many religions, some mere branches of the older and more established religions. I remember when the Pentecostal churches made their appearance. The traditional Christian churches were disgusted at what passed for religion. Priests told their congregation to beware of those who are agents of the devil posing as religious people.
The people in the establishment did not burn the churches, and although the society was firmly pro-establishment, there were no prosecutions unless the new pastors fleeced people.
The musical bands entered the churches and religious services were more akin to a dance party. But people left feeling high in spirit. The Pentecostal churches are here to stay, and the traditional churches are essentially dying, having been stuck in tradition.
We have our Jordanites who enliven many street corners.
Many of us who are not of that persuasion are still seen depositing our money at the feet of these worshippers. I remember bands like Little Jones livening up many neighbourhoods with the drums and the saxophone.
One night in my native Beterverwagting there was such a ceremony at the home of a resident. The village was out in force to see the happenings. We saw people catching “the spirit” and squirming on the ground. We went home with stories to tell. We never considered these people to be mocking our religion.
We have Muslims, Hindus and even agnostics in our midst, and we live in tolerance. It came as no surprise when the Pope even remarked that there is a limit to our tolerance, but he did not say to kill. He did exhibit a violent side to his character when he said that if a man told him about his mother, that person would get a punch.
The publishers of Charlie Hebdo should realize that some things are not part of free speech.
If that were the case, then some of us would not be arrested for threatening another, or for using foul language in public. Free speech is not an absolute.
I never heard of Charlie Hebdo until the massacre, and even if I did, I would not have bought the magazine. It goes too far. But the event makes us realize that we should teach tolerance during our assemblies. I have seen intolerant behaviour so often that I wonder how it is that we could still live among ourselves.
Young men walk the streets with no regard for people. They attack them and spark another round of intolerance. The other day a group of young men entered a church and robbed the parishioners. Some time earlier, another group targeted some old women who had gone to an Anglican Church for their usual worship.
We have also had policemen displaying high levels of intolerance. They nab a petty thief and beat him senseless. When they take him to court they stand and watch a sentence that can only be described as intolerant.
But, for the greater part, we have been forced to be tolerant in some cases. We no longer smoke in offices and in certain public places. Even smoking in some nightclubs is not tolerated. But where tolerance matters most, on the streets, there is none.
I remember the occasion when Mash Day coincided with Ash Wednesday and with a Muslim holiday. The year was 1977.
There were calls to postpone the Mash Day parade to allow the religious community to enjoy their day. This was not done, because the government of the day said that Guyana was a secular state and everyone should be allowed to enjoy the activity of his choice.
There was nothing to mock any religion, and at the end of the day everyone went home, happy. Did the Mash Day parade mock Islam and Christianity in one fell swoop? Did we disrespect any religion? We did not think so and we did not take out the guns.
In my humble opinion, I do not believe that Charlie Hebdo, under the guise of free speech, should continue to disrespect any religion.

---

---